Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32124 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2751 of 2025 Applicant :- Saddam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Harindra Pratap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 16.1.2025. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri A.K. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 928 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 115(2), 351(2), 65(2) B.N.S., 2023 and 5M/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Nandgram, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant is stated to have committed aggravated sexual assault with the minor daughter of the informant aged about 7 years in the night of 12/13.10.2024 from 11.30 pm to 3.00 am. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. The allegations are per se false. It is a clear cut case of false implication, as the applicant was in police custody at the time of offence. An application was moved by the mother of the applicant at the police station to the effect and there is no explanation by the police to the said application in the counter affidavit. 8. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2024 having no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 9. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the victim has sustained injuries and she is a girl of tender age to express her consent also, as her age was seven years only. The victim has also identified the applicant. CONCLUSION: 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the injuries sustained by the victim, that too, on the vital part, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 11. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 12. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 13. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad